This Checklist serves as an appendix to the Authoring Tool Accessibility Guidelines 2.0. It lists all of the guidelines and success criteria from ATAG 2.0 in a checkable list. For many readers, the Checklist
provides a quick reference and overview to the information in ATAG 2.0.

This list may be used to review an authoring tool for accessibility. For each guideline, indicate whether the success criteria has been satisfied, has not been satisfied, or is not applicable.

Features for meeting Part A must be accessible: The Part
A success criteria apply to the entire authoring tool user interface, including any features added to meet the success criteria in Part A (e.g., documentation, search functions, etc.). The only exemption is for preview features,
as long as they meet Guideline A.3.7. Previews are treated differently than editing views because all authors, including those with disabilities, benefit when preview features accurately reflect the actual functionality of user
agents.

Authoring systems: As per the ATAG 2.0 definition of authoring tool, several software tools (identified in any conformance claim) can be used in conjunction to meet the requirements of Part B. (e.g., an authoring tool could make use of a third-party software accessibility checking and repair tool).

Features for meeting Part B must be accessible: The Part
A success criteria apply to the entire authoring tool user interface, including any features added to meet the success criteria in Part B (e.g., checking tools, repair tools, tutorials, documentation, etc.).

Multiple author roles: Some authoring tool include multiple author roles, each with different views and content editing permissions (e.g., a content management system may separate the roles of designers, content authors, and quality assurers). In these cases, the Part B success criteria apply to the authoring tool as a whole, not to the view provided to any particular author role.

Guidelines and Success Criteria

Under each guideline there are success criteria that describe specifically what must be achieved in order to conform. They are similar to the "checkpoints" in ATAG 1.0. Each success criterion is written as a statement that will be either true or false when a specific authoring tool is tested against it.

All ATAG 2.0 success criteria are written to be testable. While some can be tested by software, others require human testers for part or all of the test.

A.3.1.1 Keyboard Access (Minimum): All functionality of the authoring tool is operable through a keyboard interface, except where editing web content properties that encode continuous input.
Note 1: This exception relates to the nature of web content, not the usual input technique. For example, setting the path of a freehand curve is exempt, while setting the endpoints of a straight line is not.
Note 2: This should not be interpreted as discouraging mouse input or other input methods in addition to the keyboard interface.

A.3.1.2 No Content Keyboard Traps:Keyboard traps are prevented as follows: (a) In the Authoring Tool User Interface: If keyboard focus can be moved to a component using the keyboard, then focus can be moved away from that component using standard keyboard navigation commands (e.g., TAB key); and (b) In Editing Views that RenderWeb Content: If an editing view renders web content (e.g., WYSIWYG view), then a documented keyboard command is provided that will always restore keyboard focus to a known location (e.g., the menus).

A.3.2.2 Timing Adjustable: If a time limit is set by the authoring tool, then at least one of the following is true: (a) Turn Off:Authors are allowed to turn off the time limit before encountering it; or
(b) Adjust: Authors are allowed to adjust the time limit before encountering it over a wide range that is at least ten times the length of the default setting; or
(c) Extend: Authors are warned before time expires and given at least 20 seconds to extend the time limit with a simple action (e.g., "press the space bar"), and authors are allowed to extend the time limit at least ten times; or(d) Real-time Exception: The time limit is a required part of a real-time event (e.g., a collaborative authoring system), and no alternative to the time limit is possible; or(e) Essential Exception: The time limit is essential and extending it would invalidate the activity; or
(f) 20 Hour Exception: The time limit is longer than 20 hours.

A.3.2.3 Static Pointer Targets: User interface components that accept pointer input are either stationary or authors can pause the movement.

A.3.7.1 Return Mechanism: If a preview is provided, then authors can return from the preview using only keyboard commands.

A.3.7.2 Preview: If a preview is provided, then at least one of the following is true:
(a) Third-Party User Agent: The preview makes use of an existing third-party user agent; or (b) UAAG (Level A): The preview conforms to the User Agent Accessibility Guidelines Level A [UAAG].

A.4.1.1 Undo Content Changes: Authoring actions are either reversible by an "undo" function or include a warning to the authors that the action is irreversible. Note 1: It is acceptable to collect a series of text entry actions (e.g., typed words, a series of backspaces) into a single reversible authoring action.Note 2: It is acceptable for certain committing actions (e.g., "save", "publish") to make all previous authoring actions irreversible.

B.2.4.2 Automated suggestions: During the authoring session, the authoring tool can automatically suggest alternative content for non-text content only under the following conditions:(a) Author Control: Authors have the opportunity to accept, modify, or reject the suggested alternative content prior to insertion; and (b) Relevant Sources: The suggested alternative content is only derived from sources designed to fulfill the same purpose (e.g., suggesting the value of an image's "description" metadata field as a long description).

B.2.5 Assist authors with accessible templates and other pre-authored content.

B.2.5.1 Templates Accessible (WCAG Level A): If the authoring tool automatically selects templates or pre-authored content, then the selections conform to WCAG 2.0 Level A when used.Note: Templates may not pass accessibility checks due to their inherent incompleteness. The accessibility status of a template should instead be measured by the accessibility of completed web content (in the final web content technology) created when the template is used properly.

B.2.5.2 Provide Accessible Templates: If the authoring tool provides templates, then there are accessible template options for a range of template uses.

A.3.5.1 Text Search:Authors can perform text searches of web content as follows:(a) Search All Editable: Any information that is text and that the authoring tool can modify is searchable, including: text content, text alternatives for non-text content, metadata, markupelements and attributes; andNote: If the current editing view is not able to display the results of a search, then the authoring tool may provide a mechanism to switch to a different editing view to display the results.
(b) Bi-Directional: The search can be made forwards or backwards; and
(c) Case Sensitive: The search can be in both case sensitive and case insensitive modes.

B.2.2.6 Status Report:Authors can receive an accessibility status report based on the results of the accessibility checks.
Note: The format of the accessibility status is not specified. For example, the status might be a listing of problems detected or a WCAG 2.0 conformance level, etc.

B.2.2.7 Metadata Production: Authors have the option of associating accessibility checking results with the web content as metadata. (Level AA)Note: The metadata format that is implemented will dictate the nature of the associated results (e.g., low-level check results, high-level conformance claims, etc.)

B.2.5 Assist authors with accessible templates and other pre-authored content.

B.2.5.3 Templates Accessible (WCAG Level AA): If the authoring tool automatically selects templates or pre-authored content, then the selections conform to WCAG 2.0 Level AA when used.Note: Templates may not pass accessibility checks due to their inherent incompleteness. The accessibility status of a template should instead be measured by the accessibility of completed web content (in the final web content technology) created when the template is used properly.

B.2.5.6 Pre-Authored Content Selection Mechanism: If authors are provided with a selection mechanism for pre-authored content other than templates (e.g., clip art gallery, widget repository, design themes), then both of the following are true:(a) Indicate: The selection mechanism indicates the accessibility status of the pre-authored content (if known); and (b) Prominence: Any accessible options are at least as prominent as other pre-authored content options.

B.2.5 Assist authors with accessible templates and other pre-authored content.

B.2.5.7 Templates in Repository: If the authoring tool provides a repository of templates, then each of the templates has a recorded accessibility status.

B.2.5.8 Pre-Authored Content in Repository: If the authoring tool provides a repository of pre-authored content, then each of the content objects has a recorded accessibility status.

B.2.5.9 Templates Accessible (WCAG Level AAA): If the authoring tool automatically selects templates or pre-authored content, then the selections conform to WCAG 2.0 Level AAA when used.Note: Templates may not pass accessibility checks due to their inherent incompleteness. The accessibility status of a template should instead be measured by the accessibility of completed web content (in the final web content technology) created when the template is used properly.